>Where to start… Marbury specifically said this offseason that he WOULD come off the bench.
Steph never once said “No.” I’m convinced of that. Not only would he not put the majority of his $20 million in jeoprady by breaching his contract, but several other Knicks players apparently confirmed that there was no jersey for him to wear<
Ted, You are wrong.
At first he said he WOULD NOT come off the bench behind Duhon (and said he would come off the bench behind Rondo if traded to Boston). When pre-season started he came in as the good soldier and said he would accept any role.

Yeah, so he said he would come off the bench. I said he said he would come off the bench, and he did in fact say that. I miss the part where I’m wrong.

To act like Marbury would help now is like saying, ‘I want to hit myself in the head with a hammer because I have a headache.’

Can anyone take a stab at explaining how the Knicks would be WORSE off with Marbury playing, than they are now with a 7-man rotation and Roberson & Tim Thomas getting minutes in the backcourt?

Caleb,

You can either accept and believe what D’Antoni has been saying on this or not.

You can either agree with his decision or not.

The goal was to develop the chemistry between Duhon, Nate, and Crawford under the new system and give them most of the minutes because they would probably be back next year. That left very few minutes for Marbury because coach D plays so few players. The feeling was that Steph would not accept a Mardy Collins type role on the team.

You can argue that Marbury is better than some or even all of those guys, but the organization was pretty much set on not resigning Marbury next year (at a minimum). So D’Antoni’s thinking on this was actually somewhat rational if you are looking out to 2009-2010.

He was basically sacrificing a few wins this year to develop the chemistry, team oriented play, knowledge of the system etc.. between those more core guys. IMHO, he also does not like Steph for all the negative intangibles he brings to the locker room and because members of the team don’t like him. I’m sure that played a part in the decision also.

Everything changed once the trade went down and Robinson got hurt.

That’s why D’Antoni DID OFFER PLAYING TIME TO STEPH!!!!!

It was Steph that said no TWICE.

How can you ask if the Knicks would be better off or not if he was playing when it’s Steph that said NO to the offer twice?

I don’t know what would have gone down if Steph played in those two games and then was benched again when the Knicks filled out the roster, but the coach has been very clear on the “WHY” he has been doing various things. It’s up to you to believe him or not, agree with him or not.

Personally, I think every team in the NBA would be stupid to sign Steph despite his talent, but I probably have a different set ideas for how to win than most. IMHO, there is no way that Steph will ever contribute to any team winning a championship. (zero probability). If he ever wins a championship with another team, the team will win “despite” his presence not because of it.

]]>By: Italian Stallionhttp://KnickerBlogger.Net/game-thread-knicks-vs-cavaliers/#comment-273111
Fri, 05 Dec 2008 14:39:35 +0000http://www.knickerblogger.net/?p=1145#comment-273111>Where to start… Marbury specifically said this offseason that he WOULD come off the bench.
Steph never once said “No.” I’m convinced of that. Not only would he not put the majority of his $20 million in jeoprady by breaching his contract, but several other Knicks players apparently confirmed that there was no jersey for him to wear<

Ted, You are wrong.

At first he said he WOULD NOT come off the bench behind Duhon (and said he would come off the bench behind Rondo if traded to Boston). When pre-season started he came in as the good soldier and said he would accept any role.

“I think we definitely have to root against LeBron winning a ring in Cleveland. If his goal is to win championships, he’s done that in Cleveland, and still leaves… he looks like a total asshole. Part of the excuse for leaving is that Cleveland isn’t in as good a position to contend as NYK. If he’s won one in Cleveland and doesn’t win one quickly once he gets to NY his “brand” could be completely ruined and people wondering why he left the place he was winning rings. If you bring an NBA dynasty to even Kalamazoo your brand is going to be huge.”
Do you see this as much different than other superstars that have won championships only to leave for greener pastures? Wilt, Shaq, Kareem, to name a few, plus many more in other sports? Their brands didn’t seem to get tarnished.
I don’t agree

I think LeBron’s image at this point is much bigger than those other players, not that Shaq ever won a championship before leaving Orlando. LeBron also seems to want to be loved by America, while part of Shaq’s charm is that he’s part superhero part villain. When Kareem and especially Wilt played the NBA was a backwater rec league compared to what it is now (I’m referring to the business aspect, not the basketball aspect).
My opinion: if he leaves and wins in NY it will blow over and the average American will forget that the Cavs even exist, if he doesn’t win in NY he looks like a failed golddigger. And by win I mean championships because as Jon Abbey will tell you, America hates (figuratively) Chris Webber.

but if this team doen’t get past a cancerous personality like Marbury ASAP, we wasted our time by bringing a coach like D’Antoni to fots around for a year until the idiot is gone.

So why is he still around then? You’ve virtually admitted that the Knicks mishandled the situation in your own argument that they haven’t mishandled the situation…
Every national news source has chimmed in to say that the Knicks have mishandled this situation, not just Mark Jackson. You’ve stated the same opinion about the Knicks’ rational about 50 times, and I still haven’t seen one person agree that there was a Walshtoni conspiracy to mislead Marbury. Everyone seems to agree that Walsh seemed unaware Marbury would not be playing. Maybe they’re secretly criminal masterminds and great actors, but Walshtoni seem like standup guys.

At this point, I don’t know that Marbs would help much – there’s a lot of bad blood. And it doesn’t matter in the long-term. But I don’t see how playing him will hurt the “development” of NBA veterans Duhon and Robinson – getting physically hurt because they’re playing 40 minutes a night with no backup would hurt their “development” more, IMO. He’s not taking minutes from Crawford and Collins now.

That’s exactly why D’Antoni changed his tune and offered minutes to Steph after the trade (Crawford and Collins were gone and Mobley wasn’t playing). Then Robinson got hurt. Steph said “NO” twice and then all hell broke loose.
Personally, I think D’Antoni made a small mistake by not telling Steph “before” game #1 what the plans were. But I really can’t see much else the Knicks did wrong. IMHO it was clear once they signed Duhon that Marbury was on his way out and Steph started yapping that he wouldn’t play behind him (being his usual delusionsal self and not even realizing the handwriting was on the wall). The big surprise was that they didn’t deal with this in the summer, but I guess Walsh was still hoping he could trade him.

Where to start… Marbury specifically said this offseason that he WOULD come off the bench.
Steph never once said “No.” I’m convinced of that. Not only would he not put the majority of his $20 million in jeoprady by breaching his contract, but several other Knicks players apparently confirmed that there was no jersey for him to wear.

]]>By: Ted Nelsonhttp://KnickerBlogger.Net/game-thread-knicks-vs-cavaliers/#comment-273094
Fri, 05 Dec 2008 08:15:31 +0000http://www.knickerblogger.net/?p=1145#comment-273094I think Mobley has serious worries about his health, he saw like 5 heart specialists when (I assume) all he would have needed would have been one or two to take a medical retirement. And his contract doesn’t expire for 1.8 seasons, so I don’t think he’d be justified in feeling like nothing but an expiring contract. He didn’t want to leave the CLIPPERS (3-15 now) because he still “believed in” their team, so I’m sure part of him was thrilled to get the opportunity to play for D’Antoni (maybe the part that used to shoot every time he touched the ball) on a team that was over .500 at the time. One reason I could see him resenting the Knicks organization could be if they pressured him towards retirement, and he figured why play for a team that doesn’t want you. I could also see the McDyess, I don’t want to move rational.

“I thought you had to have been inactive for one year to qualify for the medical retirement, but if Mobley can do it after playing almost every game for the last ten years, obviously my assumption was wrong.”

There may be a rule that if a player hasn’t played in one year you can simple force his medical retirement, Darius Miles being an example. Another one year aspect is that the salary is cleared from the cap one year after the player gets cleared for the medical retirement (not sure if it’s in full seasons or calendar years).
I suppose Jerome James may have some serious health problem(s), but the insurance company will not just pay a player to retire because he does not want to play anymore.

“Like I said, the calculations for a fair buyout are very straight forward. It’s the present value of his current contract minus what he can be signed for elsewhere. If he wasn’t such an idiot, this could have been over several weeks ago and he’d already be playing for another team.”

Like I said, what’s the present value of a contract with a few months left on it in a recession, with interest rates close to zero, and with deflationary pressure on the economy? What’s going to happen in the economy over the next 6 months? I don’t think Marbury’s thought this through, but if he were a genius he might also have a hard time agreeing on a buyout figure.

Walsh appartently offered him $2-3 mill less than his contract, which seems more than reasonable to me… At this point I agree that Marbury is killing any value he had for next season. He’s playing a game of chicken, I don’t know if he has some logical reason or it’s just for the hell of it.

“If he hadn’t been benched out of spite at the beginning of the season, it would be working out just fine right now. ”
he wasn’t benched out of spite, why is this so hard for people to understand?

To act like Marbury would help now is like saying, ‘I want to hit myself in the head with a hammer because I have a headache.’
Ridiculous.

]]>By: Zhttp://KnickerBlogger.Net/game-thread-knicks-vs-cavaliers/#comment-273051
Thu, 04 Dec 2008 20:55:01 +0000http://www.knickerblogger.net/?p=1145#comment-273051“the more I think about it — I take back what I said earlier. As radioactive as the situation is right now, the team would still be better off with Marbury…”

Yeah– I actually agree with you at this point. The situation has gotten as bad as it has, so the damage has been done. A buyout over the summer would have avoided this fiasco, which would have been beneficial for everyone (I think). But now, since the situation is officially “radioactive” we may as well see it through and keep him at least until Dec. 15th when more trade scenarios become available (it’s only 10 more days…)

“A trade is very unlikely, but you never know… we could take on huge 2009-2010 contracts (like Kenny Thomas & Brad Miller, or Shaq), along with a 1st round pick.”

What about Stephon for A. Walker, Darko, and Critendon? It saves Memphis a few $ (which they like!) and gets us something somewhat useful (a center and a PG).

or Stephon for Cardinal, Mike Miller, J. Collins, McCants, and a pick? It saves Minn. about $23 million and gives us some useful stuff. (Donnie would have to bite the bullet and waive a few guys, but it’s better than buying out Marbury at full price).

At this point, I don’t know that Marbs would help much – there’s a lot of bad blood. And it doesn’t matter in the long-term. But I don’t see how playing him will hurt the “development” of NBA veterans Duhon and Robinson – getting physically hurt because they’re playing 40 minutes a night with no backup would hurt their “development” more, IMO. He’s not taking minutes from Crawford and Collins now.

That’s exactly why D’Antoni changed his tune and offered minutes to Steph after the trade (Crawford and Collins were gone and Mobley wasn’t playing). Then Robinson got hurt. Steph said “NO” twice and then all hell broke loose.

Personally, I think D’Antoni made a small mistake by not telling Steph “before” game #1 what the plans were. But I really can’t see much else the Knicks did wrong. IMHO it was clear once they signed Duhon that Marbury was on his way out and Steph started yapping that he wouldn’t play behind him (being his usual delusionsal self and not even realizing the handwriting was on the wall). The big surprise was that they didn’t deal with this in the summer, but I guess Walsh was still hoping he could trade him.